JPET

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dayer, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Wenger, G. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dayer, C. A.
Right arrow Articles by Wenger, G. R.

Vol. 293, Issue 2, 551-558, May 2000

Effects of Ethanol on Working Memory and Attention in Pigeons1

Charlotte A. Dayer, Scott Baron2, Kim E. Light and Galen R. Wenger

Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology and Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas

To determine whether the effects of ethanol on working memory are mediated by a secondary effect on attention, dose-response curves for ethanol were determined in eight pigeons trained under a titrating matching-to-sample (TMTS) procedure, in eight pigeons trained under a discrete-trial measure of attention, and in eight pigeons trained under a continuous-trial measure of attention. Ethanol decreased accuracy under the TMTS procedure following the three highest doses (1, 1.8, and 3 g/kg). Only the highest dose (3 mg/kg) decreased rates of responding. Attention, as measured under the discrete-trial procedure, was affected only by the two highest doses (1.8 and 3 g/kg). The 3-g/kg dose caused significant decreases in the probability of a hit and probability of a correct rejection, as well as significant increases in the probability of an error of omission and response latencies. Sensitivity to the signal decreased following 1.8 and 3 g/kg ethanol. Under the continuous-trial procedure, ethanol caused a peak in false alarms after the 1.8-g/kg dose, decreased the probability of a hit following the 1.8- and 3-g/kg doses, and increased probability of a miss at all doses. Sensitivity to the signal was not affected. A comparison of the dose-response curves for the TMTS procedure and the two measures of attention revealed that working memory (TMTS) was decreased by a lower dose than that affecting attention. This suggests that the effects of ethanol on working memory are not mediated by the subject's ability to pay attention to stimulus changes in the environment.


1 This study was supported by Grant DA05815 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, Grant AA11515 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, and a grant from the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Graduate Student Research Fund.

2 Current address: Neuroscience Therapeutics, Parke-Davis Research, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48105.


0022-3565/00/2932-0551$03.00/0
THE JOURNAL OF PHARMACOLOGY AND EXPERIMENTAL THERAPEUTICS
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics






Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.